Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Quick Takes

Juliet Eilperin writes in The Washington Post: "The Environmental Protection Agency's new leadership, in a step toward confronting global warming, submitted a finding that will force the White House to decide whether to limit greenhouse gas emissions under the nearly 40-year-old Clean Air Act. Under that law, EPA's conclusion -- that such emissions are pollutants that endanger the public's health and welfare -- could trigger a broad regulatory process affecting much of the U.S. economy as well as the nation's future environmental trajectory. The agency's finding, which was sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget without fanfare on Friday, also reversed one of the Bush administration's landmark decisions on climate change, and it indicated anew that President Obama's appointees will push to address the issue of warming despite the potential political costs."

Richard Simon and Mark Z. Barabak write in the Los Angeles Times about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's diminished role: "Under President Obama, a breakthrough figure in his own right, the party has a new face, an ambitious platform and a commanding voice -- and Pelosi is discovering what it means to be back in a lesser role, with someone else setting the party's agenda and establishing its priorities."

William Branigin writes in The Washington Post: "President Obama yesterday outlined plans to spend about $59 billion in economic stimulus funds and $150 billion from the federal budget to promote what he calls America's 'clean-energy future.'"

Barack Obama writes in an op-ed that appeared in more than thirty papers around the world today: "[T]he leaders of the Group of 20 have a responsibility to take bold, comprehensive and coordinated action that not only jump-starts recovery, but also launches a new era of economic engagement to prevent a crisis like this from ever happening again...I know that America bears our share of responsibility for the mess that we all face. But I also know that we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy. That is a false choice that will not serve our people or any people."

Neil Genzlinger writes in the New York Times: "The makers of 'Ten Trillion and Counting,' Tuesday's 'Frontline' on PBS, want to make really, really, really sure that you know that George W. Bush, not Barack Obama, put the country in the economic mess it's in now. More than half the program is devoted to cataloging the Bush administration's economic policies, which, as portrayed here, come across as appallingly reckless, a burden that will grind us down for generations to come."

Al Kamen writes for The Washington Post: "The end of the Global War on Terror -- or at least the use of that phrase -- has been codified at the Pentagon. Reports that the phrase was being retired have been circulating for some time amongst senior administration officials, and [on Tuesday] speechwriters and other staff were notified via this e-mail to use 'Overseas Contingency Operation' instead."

Jose Antonio Vargas blogs for The Washington Post that five experts asked to assess Whitehouse.gov on such factors as transparency, accessibility and engagement gave the site a C+.

Michael E. Ruane writes in The Washington Post: "Tickets to the White House's annual Easter Egg Roll will for the first time be distributed online."

By Dan Froomkin  |  March 24, 2009; 12:00 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Cheney Reaction
Next: Another Way to Escape From D.C.

Comments

"Neil Genzlinger writes in the New York Times: "The makers of 'Ten Trillion and Counting,' Tuesday's 'Frontline' on PBS, want to make really, really, really sure that you know that George W. Bush, not Barack Obama, put the country in the economic mess it's in now.""

Well Neil, SOMEBODY has to. It's not like the media is going to bring it up. With all the bellyaching about the deficit I haven't heard a single media outlet remind the public that Bush concealed large portions of his deficit. None of the $1 trillion+ cost of the Iraq war was ever included in his budgets despite there being a 100% chance of using that money.

But no, bringing that up would be unfair to the GOP because it was in the past and that would be rehashing old arguments, or some such similar nonsense. Meanwhile they give a megaphone to the Republicans to stir angst over the first honest deficit estimate in a decade.

Posted by: BigTunaTim | March 24, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company